Nova Cannon limitations

[lastspartacus]

For what its worth: 1.15 hits on average a turn from one nova on a closing kroozer
0.9 hits per turn on average for str6 torps on a closing kroozer, even with their abysmal turret rating.

Novas have minimum 30cm range, which means torps get another shot over novas if their captains choose to RO and not LO with the broadsides at that range.

Torps don't have the alpha strike capability, must RO, can be intercepted by torps, can be intercepted by fighters, can be  dodged.

Novas can reduce leadership, slow ships down, scatter and damage other ships, and take out ordnance.

My only point is, one can't easily say that NC are lesser options to torpedoes, or,
'I don't always use my prow, but when I do, I make it a torpedo salvo'

[horizon]

Hi,
BaronI said the beardy NC fleet should be battled with a beardy (?) slaughter fleet to test it.

LS,
torpedoes bypass shields, small torp waves eleminate enemy fighters/torps with more accuracy the a NC (hey if my opponent fires at my ordnance I am a happy opponent...).
And I still have to see a scattering NC do damage to a ship of mine or a ship of my opponent if I shoot. +10years of playing.

NC have a frigging long range. But they lose accuracy. And even a HIT might mean only 1 or 2 hits. Stopped by shields on top. The torpedoes can do area denial en masse. They can do the same amount of maximum hits as a Nova Cannon. Just as the NC torps have drawbacks. But that's good, no weapon should be 100% in function, each weapon has a drawback or counter.



If you equip your fleet with all NC you might end up playing a scenario like the raiders where the enemy is within 30cm in turn 1. Etc.

I can understand people only wanting torps as they are more reliable then a NC.

[fracas]

can we all agree on no NC limits yet?

[BaronIveagh]

can we all agree on no NC limits yet?

Nope.  And when did I say anything about slaughters?

[lastspartacus]

I'm not completely against limits, but I'd prefer an NC everyone can agree on, and one that functions better without having to have multiples.

I like the idea of d3 hits on base, but 1d6 seems too short a scatter.

How does this digest as an alternative to the current NC rules:

90cm.  no minimum range. 2d6 scatter always.  D6 hits on stem and D3 hits on base, one hit if template is touching a base.

[Vaaish]

no 90CM max range. 2d6 is marginally better but d3 hits on the base negates that. You still have fairly low odds of even staying on the base with 2d6, just now as astronomically low as 3d6.

Give Ray's rules a shot before saying that it seems to low of scatter. A miss with them still gives over 50% odds of only doing a single hit. (50% of the time you will roll less than 4 leaving the hole over the base, of those 33% of the time you will still just do 1 damage). 1d6 guarantees you can never get the full d6 hits if you scatter and leave little for a cruiser to fear.

[horizon]

can we all agree on no NC limits yet?

Nope.  And when did I say anything about slaughters?

In tems of playtesting pages back you said something like to beat a NC fleet with an anti AC fleet (which the Slaughter fleet is).


No limits on the NC.

But if the NC gets:
less scatter on max band (1d6 up to 60 // 2d6 above 60) and Lock on I'd go for 1 / 500.

[BaronIveagh]

can we all agree on no NC limits yet?

Nope.  And when did I say anything about slaughters?

In tems of playtesting pages back you said something like to beat a NC fleet with an anti AC fleet (which the Slaughter fleet is).


No limits on the NC.

But if the NC gets:
less scatter on max band (1d6 up to 60 // 2d6 above 60) and Lock on I'd go for 1 / 500.

No, what I said was typically I used an AC fleet to kill the NC fleet while staying out of range.  D'Art was the one that suggested Slaughters instead.

[horizon]

No you argued on how to playtest all NC's fleet.

[lastspartacus]

Ok. 
90cm, no minimum distance.  Scatters 2d6, keep the d6 hits if center is on base.

Alternatively:  Same thing, but with some kind of limit on amount of NC, D6 hits if hole is on base, D3 hits if template is on base.
Also makes it more useful in low numbers.

[Vaaish]

I still don't like the 90cm max range. There isn't any reason to drop the range and it makes sense to have the min range of 30cm with the size of the template. I'd think there would be something to keep the firing ship from hitting itself. Second, 2d6 scatter with no minimum range is a bit bizarre since it can have a shell missing by a large margin even though it's effectively point blank range.

[lastspartacus]

Well you would have to be very close to risk yourself, but I guess thats the risk you take if firing at extreme close range.
Its certainly worth going to 90cm.  Saying a 110cm threat range isn't enough is like saying 'I don't care how big the board is, I should be able to hit anything, anywhere, before it has even moved.'  Its essentially unlimited range.  110cm is still giving you a couple of turns before your opponent can hope to touch you with anything besides another NC.

[Vaaish]

Well, terrain cuts down on that to a degree so you could say we've played with the NC at 90cm before. The thing is knowing you can get hit 150cm out changes how you deploy and what tactics you use and you try to deploy with terrain to keep from getting a shot in. It means that if you win first deployment you can position your forces to cover the best approaches and hopefully force your opponent to deploy in a less advantageous position. With a reduced range it doesn't matter since you have time to adjust. Shortening the range just removes one more option from the IN.

[horizon]

150cm should always be the maximum range.
The Armageddon Gun has 90cm.

[RCgothic]

Again, there's no need for a change to the NC. It's been changed quite enough over the years, and it is fine as it is.